Defence Lawyer Referred for Disciplinary Action

Justice Sidi K. Jobarteh of the Banjul High Court has asked the General Legal Council to take disciplinary action tagainst Lawyer Sagarr C.T Twum for going against her orders in open court. The Judge passed an order, but the Lawyer also stood her ground in what could be best regarded as a protest. Senior Counsel Twum requested something, which was refused by the court. She sat down and refused to continue with the case. Senior Lawyer Sagarr Twum, who was previously known as Sagarr C.T. Jahata is representing Kumba Sinyan. Kumba is standing trial on a single count of murder for allegedly killing her boyfriend at the Friendship Hostel by cutting his stomach using a razor blade. She denied the charge. She is giving marathon evidence in defence for some days now. On Tuesday, when the case was called, Lawyer Sagarr C.T Twum applied for Kumba’s phone that was already tendered in court to be given to her to continue with her testimony. This was granted by the court as there was no objection by the prosecution.

Kumba mentioned a particular taxi driver she called after the incident in an attempt to get a transport. Kumba mentioned the name and called out the phone number. The driver was one Babucarrr Mbye. The presiding judge, Justice Sidi K. Jobarteh requested the phone and pointed out that the name in the phone was stored differently from the name Kumba mentioned. Kumba Sinyan said she stored it as a Babucarr Taxi, referring to Babucarr Mbye. Lawyer Sagarr C.T Twum further asked the accused (Kumba Sinyan) if she mentioned one Ramou Sarr. State counsel M. Sanyang objected that the accused did not mention any Ramou Sarr in her previous testimony Counsel Twum stated that the accused mentioned Ramou Sarr in her testimony when she was talking about Demba Bah, a receptionist. She added that Demba Bah also talked about Ramou Sarr in his testimony when he previously appeared in court. After going through the records Justice Jobarteh highlighted that Ramou was mentioned by Kumba. Kumba provided Ramou’s Qcell and Africell numbers. The name was stored as Ramsim Kobbo. Kumba said she wants to call Ramou, Awa Faal and Mainuna Njie as witnesses in her case. The Judge intervened that the contact numbers of the mentioned people should be provided for the court’s record. Lawyer Sagarr submitted that the numbers can’t be given in an open court in the presence of people. She indicated that this is why she made a statement for the benefit of her client: “When I came this morning, I approached the court and the prosecution for the numbers and names to be given in private, but it was not accepted. So, that is why we have to do it this way.” Lawyer Sagarr later asked Kumba to provide the names and numbers of the people she would like to call as her witnesses. Kumba Sinyan indicated that she would like to call Ramou Sarr, Awa Faal, and Maimuna Njie. Justice Jobarteh requested for the number of Awa Faal, but defence Lawyer Sagarr stated that they already have the details of Awa Faal. The Judge stated the court does not have the number. The Judge held that since the question is for the accused to provide the names and number in an open court, the answer should be given in open court. She added that the number should be stated in open court or the question should be withdrawn by the defence counsel, Sagarr Twum. Lawyer Sagarr C.T Twum contended that the number cannot be called as it is in open court. She stated those are private details that cannot be called in court for everyone to hear. She sought adjournment so that she could go back and advise herself on the way forward in the case. She claimed that Kumba’s right was at stake and being violated. State counsel M. Sanyang objected to the application of the defence for an adjournment. She argued that the defence had the whole time to prepare for their defence. She submitted that the defence opened their defence on the 26th of June, which was a month ago.

Counsel M. Sanyang further submitted that the iPhone of Kumba was given to the defence 3 times after claiming that they needed the phone as evidence in their case. She stated that the defence Lawyer had time to go through the phone and prepare for their case. She added that the phone was tendered in evidence by the defence with no objections. She sighted that the defence approach as a tactic to delay the progress of the case. She urged the court to reject the application to adjourn the case. The presiding Judge, Justice Sidi K. Jobarteh, rejected the application for an adjournment and ordered the question to be answered or withdrawn. Lawyer Sagarr C.T Twum, in reply, said she would not proceed and also advised Kumba not to answer any of the questions since she has a right to remain silent. The court stood down the matter for ten minutes. On resumption, the Judge said she had overruled the application of the defence for an adjournment and ordered for the question to be answered. However, defence Lawyer Sagarr C.T Twum, in an open court, declined to proceed and maintained her position that she needed the adjournment. Justice Sidi K. Jobarteh said she found that action to be disrespectful. The Judge wanted to close the defence case, but she further advised herself that the accused does not need to suffer for her council’s actions. She indicated that she will refer the case to the General Legal Council for disciplinary actions to be taken. The case was adjourned to Thursday, 24 October 2024 for continuation.